FoxAlfa

The main issue is that all other missiles got a lot better... ether due to CFD or new autopilot or other updates... There is a constant theme in the forums.... a person comes complaints about R-27 since it feels different due to older modeling... then then three types of different replies come... 1. type: R-27 is bad missile from the ProBlue people 2. type: R-27 is good missile made bad in DCS from the ProRed people 3. type: R-27 needs an update, please wait for it before judging from the more reasonable people in the end the only way to make everybody happy and at least partly silent is the update. So in the end is there chance of ED expediting the updates to R-27s and R-77, or at least putting a timeframe on them?

@Teknetinium Track? But it should be MP stuff... missiles tend to perform a bit different in MP

You must level the playing field between FF (which can do that like M2000C, F-14 and JF-17 instantly, and apparently the Hornet will do it automatically if JMR is on) and the FC3, but I will wait for the patch to see... and arguing it to leaving it just because of 'balance/exploits' than that is a whole different can of worms that doesn't need to open... According the video I don't believe Hornet ECM implementation brings a whole new overhaul...

Regrading in ECM, the only change for now that is for sure needed, is removal of 15 sec STBY-XMT timer on all FC3 aircraft. For other stuff, we first need to see how it works on Hornet and Viper... and then see if any changes are needed to move to same level of modeling.

I completely agree that this is needed now... or at least reduced to 3 sec or so... at least taking about standby to xmit time.

I disagree, this are 'recommended' max engagement envelopes for the pilots. MiG-29 manual even instructs pilot to fire the first missile at that range and second at R2 (R-non escape zone) You wouldn't recommend with at least some accommodations for increased PK.... which in max kinematic is not possible, so it is reasonable to assume that max kinematic is bigger. All in all we need CFDs and proper autopilot updates, without them we are very much in the area of speculation.

The 900 km/h and 1100 km/h are fighter and target speeds/envelopes for the graphs... it is written on them, at least on version I have. This is exectly why we need CFDs to figure out the drag... and with drag and full mass known... it is easy to get the speeds... and I am sure with proper modeling the manual ranges will be archived no problem.

We are all wating on R-27/R-77 rework... and it looks we will wait more.... till then, I think we all agree that the current implementation lacks 'fidelity' in certain areas.

Su-17 Family plane will be great, I am really happy! Thank you!

On the missiles note... I think we all agree that R-27s and R-77 need update as soon as possible to the latest standard of guidance and fixing of EO bug. I thrust ED to sort it out how it should perform as long as logic and modeling are on the same level as Aim-120b and Aim-7, which currently they are not. And feel that should be done sooner than later, since with IR blocking clouds, R-27ET will lose it teeth even more.

Let's have a full story.... landed and was written off as unfixable... and probably lot of systems broke immediately... anyway.... misslie thread

Cool, video I wanted to share. Worth noting in the later part of BDA... Swedish air force trains to support Amraam till impact also in their simulation also quite a few missile miss from what I can tell.

Just did few tests, both in Viper, Fulcrum and Mirage... ACE F-4E can be easily defeated with in few turns and my BFM skills are average, and weak in Viper since it not my primary platform (track attached) .... I recommend brushing up on you BFM skills or attach your own track so maybe we can give you few tips how to improve. F-16 vs F-4 Ace.trk

AIM-7 semi-active radar seeker bug fixing / improvements: most of the above changes applied to active seeker were also applied to semi-active seeker. Can we maybe get this updates on R-27s and R-77 without CFD rework?

Yes, there is information, the Fulcrum manual says the illumination is kept even if target is lost, that is why the pilot is instructed that even in search mode at close range to point the aircraft at the target. As far as I understand and here, I could be wrong, the illumination is not radar mode based, but time based and lasts 60 sec after missile launched for R-27R. (As far as I know in newer Flankers there also a line on top of the Hud that is count down)

There is still issue of missiles going single chaff drop preventing any recapture (hopeful missile update will fix this like it did in the Hornet). Also like in my tracks, radar sometimes doesn't recapture, but I do agree that that is RL possibility too probably (hopeful radar power tweaks to be in RLE margins will help with this). Overall, I am back to waiting for the updates, I love the Hornet and Viper, but would also love if some time were allocated to red side too.

Again, not enough alt difference. Here is a track with me climbing (since target is also) and again both unfortunately trashed. Su-27 doppler F-4E notch launch 4 .trk

Although I wish I were wrong, but in this case unfortunately I am not. The F-4 never drops the altitude, for a proper notch target needs to drop altitude to be in ground clutter. (Also no chaff so the chaff bug is avoided) With that said at 35 seconds there is no reason for the radar or the missile to lose the target since it is looking at the target against blue (black for the radar waves) sky. Here a same case with alt difference and both R-27 are trashed Su-27 vs F-4 altdifference.trk

I think the current behavior is correct or as close to correct as FC3 can be. The main issue here is that missile is permanently lost, even if target just goes for a second trough the notch and radar tracking is restored . Since the OLS is pointing the radar "FLOOD", one would expect just degraded accuracy if the target isn't exceptionally low in ground clutter (we know that above 3000m is little effected by ground clutter in lookdown), and even if low once tracking is restored the missile should still continue to track after. The manual does states that R-27 can go up to 4 sec without guidance, also the MIG manual instructs in case of loss of tracking to 'energetically' point the plane toward there radar (that backup low range search flood mode we were discussing) and if possible, also restore tracking. Radio correction will be probably lost, but that does not equal lost missile especially if pass radio correction range. Bottom line if the target is in the notch it doesn't mean it stopped reflecting radar energy, only that is much harder (and yes sometimes at longer ranger impossible) to filter it from the background noise.

I know there are lot of moving parts and some stuff will get lost in translation. The bug was supposed to have been fixed in may-june ... was even in changelog as far as I recall, but in the end proved more complex and is still there and left for the rework. Here is Maestro last post on the topic in this thread: I see Maximus posted tracks, so please if the bug tracker is closed on the issue, it might require reopen. It is one of the things why are we looking forward to missile rework

We are going in the details but: He is explaining how TWS works and we all agree it doesn't trigger RWR and that is point of TWS he is trying to explain... but when missile goes active... he said... IF your sensors are not sensitive enough you might not get a warning... and says you might hear... bing... bing... and loud explosion.... I take his bing bing as late RWR warning.... And now back to physics... it quite simple why RWR have a much much better detection range then radars. For the radar you must have enough power to travel to the target, reflect on an irregular shape and carry enough power back to the radar so it can tell it apart from the noise and try to build up some picture. RWR just detects it power at step one... so, if radar gets back enough information to track, RWR is getting way more on the target side.

Well, the manual gives only ranges for the notching target in Mil power against certain backgrounds in format 'it should be detected in no less then range' so the worst-case scenario and that ranges are around 6-10 nm... how that translates into cold afterburning target, it is up to you judge but I do agree it is a bit overperforming... but then again if R-27T can pick up a target at range effective, OLS can probably do it better.

Also keep in mind that RL SPO-15, blinks each time you are illuminated by let's say Hornet radar, so you should be able to tell by the rate of blinks if he is in RWS or TWS on you.

There is a known bug that missiles can be defeated by just flying through the notch. If target deploy a single chaff missile almost 100% defeated even if missile is in radiocorrection phase. It is one of the issues what we are hoping the rework will resolve.

I think it is the case of "tie down the horses where the boss says"!